THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.V.MURALIDARAN
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.42 of 2012
Dr.V.Ramprakash S/o.Venkatraman .. Appellant Vs Dr.K.Maduram D/o.Krishnamurthy .. Respondent Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed u/s.19 of the Family Court Act, 1955, against the judgment of Principal Family Court, Chennai, passed in F.C.O.P.No.2702 of 2007 on 29.11.2011.
For Appellant : Mr.S.Swaminathan For Respondent : Mr.A.M.Rahamath Ali *****
J U D G M E N T
[Judgment of the Court was made by C.T.SELVAM, J.] This appeal arises against the judgment of Principal Family Court, Chennai, passed in F.C.O.P.No.2702 of 2007 on 29.11.2011.
http://www.judis.nic.in
2. Appellant and respondent are husband and wife. Their marriage was solemnized on 22.03.2000. Out of the wedlock, a male child was born to them on 14.06.2001. Differences arose between them. Respondent/wife moved F.C.O.P.No.2702 of 2007 on the file of Principal Family Court, Chennai, seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty.
3. Before Court below, appellant/husband examined himself and marked 16 exhibits. Respondent/wife examined herself and marked 17 exhibits. On appreciation of evidence and materials before it, Court below, under judgment dated 29.11.2011, allowed the petition granting a decree of divorce. There against, the present appeal has been filed by appellant/husband.
4. Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned counsel for respondent.
5. In allowing the petition moved by respondent/wife, Court below has reasoned as follows:
(i) It is the evidence of respondent/wife that appellant/husband availed huge loans from various institutions by showing respondent/wife as guarantor by forging her signature. In support of her evidence, respondent/wife has marked Ex.P6 - certified copy of FIR and Ex.P7 – remand report filed in Crime No.349 of 2008 by CBCID Metro Wing which revealed that on 20.11.2008 appellant/husband was remanded to judicial custody on the charge of forgery and impersonation. Ex.P8 is the order copy of bail.
http://www.judis.nic.in
(ii) Perusal of Ex.P9 – final report revealed that a thorough investigation has been conducted in the case, that CBCID has obtained expert opinion on the signature of respondent/wife and came to the conclusion that appellant/husband has forged the signature of respondent/wife.
(iii) Since both appellant/husband and respondent/wife are Doctors, they started a Dental Clinic at Pudukottai. However, appellant/husband instead of concentrating on his profession, invested huge monies in stock markets and suffered heavy loss. Moreover, in his counter, appellant/husband has admitted that he was unable to discharge the liability and hence, he approached this Court to declare him as insolvent. The above clearly revealed that he has pressurized and harassed respondent/wife and her parents demanding money. Unable to bear the torture of appellant/husband, respondent/wife left the matrimonial home and lived with her parents. Even thereafter, appellant/husband went to parental home of respondent/wife and threatened her and her parents to withdraw the criminal complaint preferred against him.
(iv) A perusal of evidence of PWs.1 to 3 as well as RW-1 and the complaint preferred against appellant/husband revealed that appellant/husband has inflicted mental as well as physical cruelty on respondent/wife.
On the above reasoning, Court below found that there were no possibility of reunion and accordingly, granted a decree of divorce. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the judgment under challenge.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.T.SELVAM, J
and
M.V.MURALIDARAN, J
mrr/gm This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal shall stand dismissed. No costs.
Index:yes/no Internet:yes mrr/gm To The Principal Family Court, Chennai.
[C.T.S., J] [M.V.M., J] 13.11.2017
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.42 of 2012
http://www.judis.nic.in